Fujifilm has no plans for a full frame camera for now

In a recent interview with 2how.com, Fujifilm's manager Mr.Kawahara said that for now there are no plans for a full frame camera because that will require a new line of lenses (the current XF lenses will not cover a full frame sensor). Here are few other interesting points from the interview:

For now there are no plans for a new X-PRO1 successor, but there will be another X-Pro1 firmware update.

Fujifilm is considering sensors bigger than 16MP in the future (obviously).

Fujifilm is committed to releasing firmware updates for their cameras (even older models).

I have so much invested in XF lenses and so happy with the results I’ve been getting with the X Pro-1 I’m fine with no FF. Focus could be faster, both AF and manual but can be dealt with firmware updates.

Robert

I think Fuji have reached the functional limit of autofocus speed with X-Pro 1 firmware updates. It’s not gonna get any better than it is now, which, sadly, isn’t very good.

It will take a new generation of hardware to fix this issue…and it sounds like this isn’t coming anytime soon.

mikeswitz

Hey Robert, your back!? Have you figured out which end of the camera to look through yet? You wouldn’t know facst auto focus if it bit you on the ass. And you know Fuji engineering how?

Robert

What I HAVE figured out is which end of your body your comments come from. Betcha don’t have the stones to say this sort of stuff to my face… If ya do, step up and let’s meet face-to-face…then we’ll see how brazen you are with your comments.

mikeswitz

I thought you lived in Europe. I got plenty of stones, just not the time to fly to Eastern europe right now. And I’m not the one signing in anonymously.

Robert

Yeah, I’m not talking about the stones you throw from a safe distance, bubba.

BTW, I don’t live in Europe. And near as makes no difference I’m not signing in anonymously anymore than you are. Maybe check your facts the next time you hurl erroneous cyber-insults from the safety of your parents’ basement suite.

mikeswitz

Listen, a**hole, you might learn something.
1. You sign in as Robert, a well known troll on this site that everyone who has been here for more than 2 days, knows. But you are not Robert because you are not a member of Disqus so you are a guest with no profile, essentially anonymous. I am not. I’m signed in as mikeswitz, with a profile. All the while you strut around like you have a very small dick. True sign of a troll.
2. You make statements about products you may or may not own, but about which you have no knowledge, unless you work for Fuji. I seriously doubt you are an engineer. Oh, like so many trolls before you.
3. You have the incredible audacity ( or very small dick) to tell Thom Hogan anything about cameras. Considering the little that you have posted, I would think you might shut up long enough to learn something.
4. I live and work in LA as a professional film/TV director. I would love to get out of my mother’s basement so I could watch you flex your muscles, big boy. How about you?

Justin

You guys are funny, both should come to the FightClub… Oh, I forgot rules – there is no FightClub… 🙂

mikeswitz

Oh, its real. Ever been to Nikon Rumors. Those guys can fight over which is a better lens cap.

Sean cook

Boy, that’s rough news. It’s nice that they will likely continue to make great aps-c lenses, but just updating firmware isn’t quite enough to build off of in this climate.

LOL

Then it is worse for them: lower prices limited by FF proposal and still low sales which was only 700.000 for all X cameras since released.

Perhaps FF mirrorless (of which I am still a big fan, at least in the abstract) was a bit too hyped? Too little too late? On Amazon mirrorless ranking, the E-M1 is still #2, but the a7 has fallen to #15.

My long-term prediction is still that we will all be migrating to smaller sensors…

madmax

Agree. APSC and maybe 4/3 for most pro uses and 4/3 and 1″ for advanced amateurs.

Advantages of smaller formats for photojournalism and sports:
-More depth of field with the same aperture, meaning less out of focus objects or motion-blurred pictures. Also, with longer lenses, you still can get good out of focus blur.

-Much smaller, lighter, unobstructive equipment.
I don´t see a future for FF. For studio work MF is better and there MF size and weight is not a problem.

EcoR1

“Smaller formats”? Go to your local shop and compare Sony A7/A7R to Fuji APSC-cameras. See the size difference? Me neither. And you can as easily use Sony APSC- E-mount lenses as the E-mount FF-lenses with these cameras. And the crop-factor advantage… …that doesn’t exist if the pixel size is the same between FF and smaller format sensor. You can even now pick 36Mpix A7R and use it in crop mode, which gives you ~16Mpix APSC-size images. This is the most important thing you have to understand: Sensor size limits only the upper size-limits for lens used. You could still have small FF-sensor camera, and insanely small lens, that uses only the part of the sensor, as long as the sensor resolution is enough. The only downside at the moment is higher cost for FF, but that won’t be such a problem in couple of years.

madmax

Thanks for your answer, but I think you are wrong. Of course I agree you can adapt smaller format lenses, but the result is a lot of vignetting, corner softness, field curvature and purple fringing. You can´t use smaller format lenses but bigger format lenses.

docphoto

if you put on an aps-c sized lens on a full frame sensor it’s gonna vignette of course… but many cameras, such as the a7 have the option to only use ‘aps-c part’ of the sensor, cropping off the outside, eventually giving you exactly what the lens would give you on an aps c sensor!

BP2012

Agree 100% but I’m warning you of a a risk to get uncivilized reply to your comment from a certain self-styled scientist 🙂

AnthonyH

Ultimately, it’s the results that matter. If Fujifilm can continue to get results competitive with other manufacturers’ 35mm sized sensors from smaller APS sized sensors, then more power to them. However, many consumers still subscribe to the bigger is better theory.

madmax

I think they are right. Near nobody really needs FF. The problem with Fuji is the lack of small collapsible zooms. Also a SLR style body would be very welcome as not everybody likes rangefinder style cameras.

kuishinbou

They will apparently be announcing a SLR-like body in less than a month.

OzPhotographer

What’s to stop them from going full frame, but having a DX mode built in? And then just gradually rolling out a new line of full frame lenses. I think something like this would be ideal..Particularly in an X-E2 type body which only has an EVF.

If you want a small light kit, shoot in DX mode with the XF lenses.. and if you want full frame, put on a larger full frame lens.

Thom Hogan

They’ve sold 700k X cameras (including compacts). How many full frame cameras do you think they’d sell, and how much do you think the R&D on new lenses would cost them?

While the can technically do what you suggest, I’m not sure it’s the best course of action. Sony, of course, has decided to “do everything,” but that’s also meant that we’re not getting specialty lenses for any of their four “mounts”, just the basics over and over.

Personally, I’d rather have Fujifilm focused and doing one thing right.

Anónimo

Do you think X mount is large enough to be used with a FF image circle?

Sony created a lens design problem with the ultra short flange to focal plane distance. Unless they use microlenses or a diffusion optic as Leica has implemented, then Sony will need very retrofocus lens designs.

So like the NEX line the small body may attract some people, but then a big lens on the front unbalances the camera. Sony will likely try to make more pancake lenses. In comparison, the real advantage of the Fuji X system is the reasonable lens sizes.

Anónimo

You’re right but what I meant to say is that there is a difference of the inner circles of both mounts and the Fuji seems a bit short to accommodate the FF sensor within it’s limits.

I think Fuji would need a complete redesign to make the X line full frame. After that an entire new line of lenses would be needed. I thought Fuji may move in that direction, though considering the slow pace of sales, the move to full frame may be more than two years away.

One thing i think more likely is a fixed lens Fuji with full frame sensor. Something more along the lines of the Sony RX1 cameras. Personally that would appeal to me more than another line of interchangeable lens cameras.

waterengineer

I understand your point(s) and largely agree. Further, I could probably be happy with a Crop-sensor X camera if Fuji would design and make a f/0.95 lens or two for it. Some of us want not only fast but the smashed out blur that only a fast lens can provide.

Thom Hogan

That blur comes in the center of the frame, too ;~). Basically none of the f/1.4 full frame optics have all that great of performance wide open, and none of the f/1 or faster ones in smaller formats do, either. Frankly, the smart decision is exactly what Fujifilm is doing: reasonably fast lenses that perform well wide open.

CRB

yep, but no one seems to realize that…f1.4 lenses wont have great performance wide open, they want blurred background, and get also blurred faces once you print larger…lol

sperdynamite

Oh yeah, all the masters worried about absolute sharpness when shooting wide open and printing large. Because sharp reproduction is the be all end all of photography. This is why Skymall is the highest form of photographic art. Everything is so sharp!

Read the FAQ

I agree 100%. Mr.Kawahara sounds like an intelligent person. I like that he wants to listen to his customers but still holds his ground on insisting that 16 MP with the X package in APS-C is plenty and that a dozen lenses to choose from is quite enough. If he caters too much to all the faux-tographers out there, Fuji can easily lose sight of what they are currently doing right. And is to provide small form factor cameras that are pleasurable to use and with high image quality.

I’d also much rather see them improve on what they already do best, and also focus on higher quality optics rather than just higher quantity of lens choices. A Fuji X camera is perfect for what it is and its intended use. If one needs full frame and higher megapixels (e.g. studio work), then just choose a different tool (D800E, MF, or LF digital back, etc..) The X series fills the portable 35mm film camera slot (although with close to medium format film quality in respect to printing large.)

Thom Hogan

Exactly. Kawahara-san’s biggest problem is selling his upper management that the digital camera business will provide a real ROI in the foreseeable future. His best shot at doing that is taking what is working, iterating and improving it.

Because of sensor costs, full frame is always going to be more expensive than APS, and then you have the additional issues of bigger lens imaging circle to contend with, so you end up with another set of lenses. Because a full frame camera is more expensive than an APS one, you sell fewer, so the return comes more slowly.

The sweet spot really is the m4/3 to APS continuum, I believe, and will continue to be until you can drop full frame sensor costs by a factor of probably at least 5, maybe more. That’s not going to happen any time soon.

Jaladhi

I would like to see them develop a couple of fixed lens full frame cameras. One with a 40mm prime and another with a short zoom. Very much like their GA medium format autofocus film cameras. The hybrid viewfinder should work well on these. They shouldn’t have to commit a lot of resources for that and they would not set the expectations for a full range of new lenses.

grapposoda

Guess it’s hard to say much about the actual FUD-to-fact ratio in this context.
But from what we’ve seen from mass marketed FF mirrorless so far (ie the A7 twins) it can’t yet solve the bag of hurt of the APS-C systems — wide-aperture wide angles.

Guest

What Fuji says and what it ultimately does are two different things. Full Frame is not overhyped, there are a ton of benefits to the format. Fuji will most likely release a Full Frame camera in 2014.

Guest

Fuji won’t admit a Full Frame is coming, it would cause their current APS-C lineup to tank.

Pat Mann

Baloney. Full frame doubles the bulk and weight of a system and at least doubles or triples the price of the equivalent setup. At double the price, the market share for full frame is 1/10 or less given the ever increasing quality of APS-C results. APS-C is a sweet spot for quality, compactness and price for everyday use and travel. The current Fujifilm lineup is exactly what I am looking for as a step up from my Nikon APS-C system, which has become a dead end with no lens support beyond a couple of nice zooms, an infinite variety of almost identical slow consumer zooms I have no interest in, and full frame telephotos for wildlife. There are no photojournalism-style primes wider than an f/1.8 (what’s up with that – why no f/1.4?) normal tuned to the system. The Fuji X with 23, 12 Zeiss and 58 looks like an outstanding system exactly tuned to APS-C at less than half the price of an equivalent Nikon full frame system. In APS-C, there’s nothing even closely comparable available.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Fujifilm came out with a medium format or panorama camera based on their past experience with interesting 6x format cameras and lenses, but if they come out with a full frame or medium format system it’s not going to be priced to take any market from APS-C.
If Nikon doesn’t bring the lenses, I will continue to use my Nikon APS-C, and upgrade it if they ever come out with a high-end APS-C DSLR, but only to carry a sensor for birding. What I used to do with medium format is about to be handled again by a D800 and a couple of Zeiss lenses, but I don’t want to pack a complete monster system based on that format when I’m not on a photographic mission but just out and about and want a camera along.

guest

Are you a paid Fuji stooge? No lens support from Nikon for APS-C? Are you for real? You do know that you can use ALL Nikon Full Frame lenses on their APS-C cameras. Nikon makes some of the best Full Frame lenses on the market, and fast glass, too.

a4

Uhmm, well, and the point in using fullframe primes (at a “fullframe” price) on a DX body is…? For instance, my current lens lineup with my D7000:

Nikon has lots of 18-xx zoom lens options for DX, not much else. Sure, you can use FX lenses on DX bodies, but the 1.5x crop factor means that this really only benefits normal to telephoto uses.

The best DX lenses at present that are below the “normal” focal length tend to all be from third parties, which Nikon technically doesn’t support (see recent Sigma issues). The ONLY real exceptions are the 10-24mm and 12-24mm. And if you want “fast” lenses, Nikon gives you only the old and heavy 17-55m with no stabilization, and the 35mm. Oh sure, you can put the very expensive 24mm f/1.4 FX and get a 35mm equivalent or the 28mm f/1.8 FX and get a 42mm not really wide equivalent, but if you want to shoot fast, you have better options from the third party makers. And optically superior, too.

So if @disqus_busAMiWtBy:disqus was referring to NIKON”S support of DX, I’d agree with him, 100%.

This is the danger of “too many mounts.” When companies spread themselves thin on many mounts, you won’t get a lot of options from the primary maker. The good thing about Fujifilm (and Sony) is that they’re sharing mount information with third parties.

El Aura

You can count the 58 mm f/1.4 as a lens that has a focal length that fits DX.

Thom Hogan

A lens far more expensive than most DX bodies ;~). And it really only solves the fast 85mm problem.

El Aura

Solving the lens problems one lens at a time.

Guest

Nikon has the 50mm 1.4, also the 50mm 1.8 is only about $200, both are Full Frame and APS-C compatible. Nikon also makes the newer 28mm 1.8G which is a beauty. I’m missing a number of Nikon lenses but the options are there.

A 40mm lens on a Full Frame camera is still a 40mm lens on APS-C. It’s the crop factor of the APS-C camera that alters the FOV.

I did a number of tests with my old APS-C DX lenses versus Nikon Full Frame FX lenses on a Full Frame Canon 5D MkII regarding focal length. The Nikon 1.8/35mm DX G lens is still a 35mm lens on a Full Frame camera. It’s the APS-C cropped sensor that alters the FOV versus a Full Frame sensor that delivers true FOV. FX lenses are better value because you can use them on more than one format (DX & FX). Many DX lenses have heavy vignetting which limits their use on Full Frame cameras without cropping.

The market is correcting itself. The Full Frame format has been around for close to 100 years. APS-C was an offshoot of Kodak’s failed Advantix film format of the 1990’s and a digital leftover from when large sensors were prohibitively expensive to manufacture in the early 2000’s.

Full Frame is the better format. Almost all Full Frame cameras shoot in cropped format for photographers who still use APS-C lenses. As prices of sensors continues to drop, APS-C will be squeezed out. Sony is planning on bringing out a very inexpensive Full Frame cameras in 2014. Sony sells its sensors to other companies, even Fuji.

Thom Hogan

Sure. Those lenses are also bigger than they have to be for DX, and there’s no prime solution that gives you an angle of view of less than 42mm equivalent. There are also no fast zooms in the wide, mid-range, or near telephoto realm.

Note that those things ARE happening in other mounts now, though not in Canon EF-S and Nikon DX. All Canon and Nikon are doing is giving competitors an opening.

Guest

Nikon has the 50mm 1.4, also the 50mm 1.8 is only about $200, both are Full Frame and APS-C compatible. Nikon also makes the newer 28mm 1.8G which is a beauty. I’m missing a number of Nikon lenses but the options are there.

A 40mm lens on a Full Frame camera is still a 40mm lens on APS-C. It’s the crop factor of the APS-C camera that alters the FOV.

I did a number of tests with my old APS-C DX lenses versus Nikon Full Frame FX lenses on a Full Frame Canon 5D MkII regarding focal length. The Nikon 1.8/35mm DX G lens is still a 35mm lens on a Full Frame camera. It’s the APS-C cropped sensor that alters the FOV versus a Full Frame sensor that delivers true FOV. FX lenses are better value because you can use them on more than one format (DX & FX). Many DX lenses have heavy vignetting which limits their use on Full Frame cameras without cropping.

The market is correcting itself. The Full Frame format has been around for close to 100 years. APS-C was an offshoot of Kodak’s failed Advantix film format of the 1990’s and a digital leftover from when large sensors were prohibitively expensive to manufacture in the early 2000’s.

Full Frame is the better format. Almost all Full Frame cameras shoot in cropped format for photographers who still use APS-C lenses. As prices of sensors continues to drop, APS-C will be squeezed out. Sony is planning on bringing out a very inexpensive Full Frame cameras in 2014. Sony sells its sensors to other companies, even Fuji.

a4

“A 40mm lens on a Full Frame camera is still a 40mm lens on APS-C. It’s the crop factor of the APS-C camera that alters the FOV.”

…and then the final image taken with a 1.5 crop camera will have FOV equivalent to the one of a 60mm lens on a FF, won’t it?! I really don’t get what you’re trying to say here. Sure, number 140.99 will always be 140.99, no matter what, it’s only the physical unit that makes the difference… :/

NoMeJodas

APS-C has its benefits too: Smaller body and lens sizes (if the manufacturer did actually bother to make APS-C lenses), one gets the best of FF lenses (the center), APS-C lenses are usually cheaper, you get more reach with the same lens and the most important thing: you get more DoF at the same FoV and F-number. And Fuji has already demonstrated with their X-System that comparaple IQ to FF can be achieved with APS-C.

All that said, I personally consider APS-C as complementary format to FF. There are fields in photography where APS-C would fit better, but there are also other fields where FF is almost obligatory.

Neopulse

Sucks about the delay of the X-Pro 1 successor :-/, but chances are it might have a new sensor technology incorporated into it so it’ll be worth the wait. The lenses I keep reading about people raving about how good they are. In the end, good for them maintaining their great position in the APS-C market.

Thom Hogan

Hasn’t really sold. While the hybrid viewfinder sounds great, buyers are selecting the X-E1/2, indicating that they don’t value the extra optical option over saving some money.

Neopulse

I see….. Well thanks for the info. I haven’t bought a Fuji yet, but if I do it’ll be an XE-2 because of the reasonable price point and performance.

Clint

The problem with the hybrid viewfinder on the XPro1 is that the framelines on the OVF are grossly inaccurate. If this is improved in the upcoming FW update….well then there would be a lot more value to the OVF.

For me, and anyone else that cares about viewfinder accuracy the XPro1 OVF is just too inaccurate and I would actually prefer the cheaper XE2 with a higher resoloution, 100% accurate EVF only…

Clint

The problem with the hybrid viewfinder on the XPro1 is that the framelines on the OVF are grossly inaccurate. If this is improved in the upcoming FW update….well then there would be a lot more value to the OVF.

For me, and anyone else that cares about viewfinder accuracy the XPro1 OVF is just too inaccurate and I would actually prefer the cheaper XE2 with a higher resoloution, 100% accurate EVF only…

Robert

As an X-Pro 1 owner, I find I tend to have a love/hate relationship with this camera.

PROS:
– When it nails everything, image quality is truly on par with many full-frame sensors

– Low light capability is the best in the industry for APS-C

– Several of the Fuji XF lenses are stellar; the XF 35mm f/1.4 R is fantastic

– The size, profile, and feel of the camera is great in the hands (without being terribly heavy), especially with a half-case on it

The Q menu on the camera is basically well executed

CONS:
– Generally it’s operationally laggy

– Autofocus, while improved, is still painfully slow too often, and many times still misses

– No built-in diopter for a viewfinder that is smaller than the X100 series

– Inaccurate framelines in the OVF

– EVF that is a bit too low res to be comfortable

– Inaccurate manual focusing scale

– New focus peaking is far too indistinct to see without magnifying the image, which is distracting, takes one “out of the composition”, and generally slows things further, making manual focusing still a chore at best

– In Aperture Priority (for example) the camera will not display both shutter speed and aperture unless you press the shutter release slightly, whereupon both settings lock, even if the light changes or you move the camera around. So there’s no real time exposure values available in the viewfinder unless you keep removing and slightly repressing the shutter release button (which causes the camera to run through the whole clunky autofocus process again and again), which equals more lag

– Battery life is bad and still no proper indication as to true power level once you lose a bar

– Still no good mainstream RAW support unless you want to add another parameter to your workflow (e.g. Iridient)

Most of the other quirks one can live with, but when the camera’s core features cause one to miss shots, then it quickly turns into a deal breaker.

My feeling about autofocus in 2013 ― on a camera of this caliber ― is that either it should be state-of-the-art, or it shouldn’t be included at all.

I commend Fuji for continuing to release firmware updates, but it begs the question: would they be doing that if this camera had been more refined before release and not rushed to market?

Thom Hogan

Right. Most of the appeal of the OVF/EVF tends to disappear in the execution: there are many small issues that make the extra cost not worth the gains. It’s an engineering marvel, but not a shooting marvel, basically. I’ve held onto my X-Pro1 because I keep thinking there’s a situation where that OVF will be what I need, but in practice I always pick up my X-E1 (now 2) instead.

sperdynamite

THe OVF was garbage of the X100 and Pro1 due to inconsistent hits. But on the X100s it it’s imminently useful. That thing don’t miss much. I love. When the Pro1 gets phase detect (which should be offered as an ‘s’ model and a mail in upgrade to existing owners btw), it’ll be a game changer, for those that want it. At least that’s from my experience shooting with the camera. The E models are just cheaper so of course they sell more. Sorta like D700 vs D3. The Pro1 in my view feels way better balanced, but just doesn’t have the performance over the E1 to justify the costs.

Anónimo

That question mark is what worries me and prevent from buying the X-E2 right away because they are developing an “organic sensor” with Panasonic and this raises me doubts about their future support of X-trans.
For instance, DxO doesn’t support X-trans because it would mean a big investment (as their algorithms are base on Bayer sensors) and they are not sure about Fujifilm’s future options.

Neopulse

I see, didn’t know DxO wasn’t planning on supporting it. And also, I think the X-Trans sensor is worth it. I fiddled with the X-Pro 1 last winter (which was July down here) and it was quite a good, compact camera. And the XE-2 incorporates slightly newer tech and smaller than the X-Pro 1. I think it’s worth it if you are buying your first interchangeable Fuji camera.

Clint

Who cares about DXO?? In the last 10 years that I have been shooting digital and used countless versions of PS, LR, Canon DPP etc, and I have never used DXO.

Sure I’m curious to see how the XPro would score in their sensor database but that’s where my interest in DXO ends.

Anónimo

As a matter of fact I do and besides I also use PS, Aperture and Capture NX2 this fact can make a difference to my decision to update it to the new version and/or buying a Xtrans sensor and forget about the convenience of the software.

I doesn’t mean It is the only way to get good results but DxO Pro is very convenient for the automatic conversion of RAW files and giving it up means loosing this advantage when time really matters.

By the way DxO Optics Pro version 9 it won the 2013 TIPA and EISA prizes so may not be as bad as that… 🙂

Clint

Who cares about DXO?? In the last 10 years that I have been shooting digital and used countless versions of PS, LR, Canon DPP etc, and I have never used DXO.

Sure I’m curious to see how the XPro would score in their sensor database but that’s where my interest in DXO ends.

DTB

“For now” are the key words. Perhaps they will introduce a full frame X200 at Photokina. Unfortunately, they may not have the capacity and resources to produce and support a full frame and an APS-C system. If they could, however, it would undoubtedly be a very nice system, as Fuji designs very nice cameras and high-quality lenses. I would likely buy one.

Thom Hogan

Ah, now a full frame compact is a different story. They didn’t say they wouldn’t do one of those, to my knowledge ;~)

Vin

Perhaps a X100S FF, first out of the gate.
Agree, Fuji needs to play out the aps-c. At least fill out lenses and accessories.
The new 23mm looks strong. Next a portrait, and telephoto.

Vin

P.S.,
Nice reviews on Df, & A year Behind, a year ahead.

Akiva S.

They are great at firmware upgrades.

Ernst

What i like is that they continue to provide firmware updates for cameras out of production – i a time where everybody only talks about the next camera – New features and improvements are back ported – where as other brands do not care about existing customers or have the attitude that the customer can buy the new model…in a time where all cameras take good pictures such services are appreciated by customers who don’t want to keep up with the crazy fast product replacement cycles…

Clint

So what exactly is news here…..everybody knows that Fuji supports old models with FW…most everybody knows that XF lenses are not full-frame compatible. Also…everyone knows that Nikon tried telling people the same thing until they released the D3 in 2007.

There WILL be a full frame from Fuji…maybe not in 2014…but it’s coming.

Jakob

First of all big cheers to Fuji because of their dedication to user and thereby customer support!
Although I find the news about no plans for a X-Pro 2 very saddening, as I really love that viewfinder! I wonder how hard it would be for Fuji to offer something similar to what Leica did with the early M8s and other companies (i.e. RED) is doing with high-end video-equipent: a sensor(&processor)-upgrade. If I could get the new AF and esp. also the possibilities of video for say a 500$ send-in upgrade I’d go for it.
Although I’m really happy with where the X Pro1 is, it’s just annoying that I have to keep the DSLR-gear just a round of video every now and then.